Films with lesbian and gay themes and content produced by major Hollywood production companies over the last ten years have signaled a significant increase in accessible assets that compel and support sexuality discussions for people who have not recently been exposed to elective assets, particularly for those who have not recently been exposed to elective assets. For example, Hollywood films and television have become substantial, if not competing, sources of information for practically all children in developed countries (Australia, Europe, and North America). Lesbian/gay critics and distributors approve a film containing lesbian or gay characters as a critical film once it has been widely distributed, regardless of how insignificant their involvement is. Hence, compliment it, and highlight its contribution to lesbian and gay visibility.
In this study, the research question is; why do media representations portray violence against LGBTQ members? The inclusion of LGBT characters on television is critical for two reasons. It is important to remember that media portrayals of LGBT persons can significantly impact how the general public views the LGBT community and the issues surrounding it. Second, positive media representation can benefit members of the LGBT community, particularly teens in the USA. For that reason, a recent study suggests that surveyed 245 college students in 2002 on their viewing of Will & Grace and their attitudes about homosexual males. Therefore, the issue calls for a study to bring insights into the cause and effect of the media representations’ portrayal of violence against LGBTQ members to the general public in the United States using mixed methods, both qualitative and quantitative research methods.
Review of the Literature
I studied (Cover, 2000); Cover, Rob. “First Contact: Queer Theory, Sexual Identity, and ‘Mainstream’ Film.” International Journal of Sexuality and Gender Studies, Kluwer Academic, vol. 5, no. 1. However, it addresses questions about the role of queer theory in media criticism, concentrating on four recent “mainstream” films with significant lesbian and homosexual content. Therefore, it is argued that these films work within established sexual paradigms that require both the “truth” of the hetero/homo and public self-disclosure split. Nevertheless, the ways lesbian/gay media products disseminate that discourse is examined in light of the repercussions of such widely distributed films serving as a “first contact” point for many people with that discourse.
Dean (2000) wrote an article about the strength of LGBT people. Many people in this class share simple, friendly humiliation and separation regularly. Stagnation impacts LGBTQ people’s well-being as well as clinical professionals’ ability to focus on them, as well as other societal and social issues. Lesbians, gays, bisexuals, sexually open people, and transsexuals (LGBT) are as diverse as the rest of the population in the United States (Dean, 2000). How important one’s sexual orientation or character is to one’s self-definition, how closely one links to other LGBT people, and how dismissive or accepting of social assumptions and bigotry varies substantially among persons are all important considerations.
These requirements are similar to those seen in other minority groups. In a few key demographic groups, gay and sexually open people are underrepresented. Lesbian, gay, and sexually open (LGB) people’s sexual direction is a complicated and ever-changing concept. After some time and across many districts, the sexual direction has evolved and changed. Even though sexual orientation is not easily defined, LGB people desire intrigue, warmth, sexual activity, and self-identification as sexually open or gay/lesbian.
On the contrary, there is a case to be made for an overriding “need” for materials that characterize non-heterosexuality and serve as a foundation for the construction of asexuality different from heterosexuality (for which there is a great proliferation of material throughout the film, televisual media, family, and standardized education). Hence, it is crucial to remember that individuals who develop non-heterosexual sexualities do so by “learning” homosexuality. As Willie Edwards (1996) discovered, “gay identity formation may be less difficult if knowledge explaining or rationalizing the adolescent’s homosexual thoughts and behaviors is supplied.”
Furthermore, according to Padva (2007)’s article, “Representations of LGBT Bullying in Media and Popular Culture,” the media affect viewers’ beliefs and behaviors, including their acceptance of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals. Given the high prevalence of victimization experienced by LGBT adolescents, it is crucial to investigate the ‘common sense’ portrayals made by entertainment media for a youth audience. While the majority of existing scholarship on LGBT representation in youth-oriented media is insightful, it typically concentrates on a small number of teen television episodes or films created as part of the New Queer Cinema movement and frequently takes a provocative, queer theory-informed perspective.
Using social authority as a focus point, (Siebler’s 2010) suggestion attempts to address a gap in the literature by examining LGBT portrayal in mainstream American children’s films from 1995 to 2013. It examines the diversity of LGBT representations, their commonalities, and critiques of established tropes. “Transqueer representations and educational practices. The Journal of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Youth Kay Siebler (2010). This article investigates how popular media portrayals of transqueers (particularly male to female transsexuals) affect public attitudes of transqueers both inside and beyond the LBGT community.
To “pass” as a male, these social depictions of FTM transqueers sometimes depict them undergoing surgical procedures or using drugs. The piece motivates instructors to try even harder and more unwaveringly to teach understudies about the inflexibility of the orientation/sex predicament and how it renders transsexual people nonentities. The paper (Siebler, 2012) contends that understudies should be recalled for these conversations and that texts should be used to entangle the twofold sex/orientation, as depicted in media portrayals of transgender people. There are two sex and orientation pairs in modern times: Journal of Gay and Lesbian Mental Health, Kay Siebler. Transparent was named the “Hot TV Show” in Rolling Stone’s “Hot List 2014.” (Glazer and Jacobson). The show’s popularity can be attributed to the “authentic” mood, flashback technique, storyline inventiveness, and acting quality.
According to Jill Soloway, the show’s creator, “there is a zeitgeist in the trans- community. Also, this show happened to land at the right time; it could not have been done five years ago.” Transparent is just one, albeit extraordinary, the example of what has been labeled the “present trans television boom”: “Television is undergoing a metamorphosis,” Elio Iannacci writes. I want to analyze this claim of Trans-hotness and make critical observations about current television shows starring prominent transgender characters. While these two aspects are significant, the following unsolved questions persist: When resources and information are made available, who provides them, under what sexual principles and classifications of sexuality do they operate, why are they made available, and what are the potential repercussions of their provision?
Regarding non-hetero issues in film, underground and nonconformity productions such as lesbian and homosexual home movies were the most popular choices (Field, 1995, p. 4). In the last ten years, major Hollywood production companies have detonated films with lesbian and gay subjects and content, signaling a critical expansion of assets that oblige and support sexuality discussions, particularly for those individuals, primarily youth, who have not previously been exposed to elective assets (Siebler, 2012). Adolescents in developed countries approach both Hollywood movies and network programming to learn about their environment (Australia, Europe, and North America). Lesbian/gay critics and distributors, regardless of how tiny a role they play, frequently hail and praise the excellence of films with lesbian or homosexual characters when they are widely distributed. Notably, these films and television programs may frequently be the first point of contact for a young person with non-heteronormative concerns and sexual desires; for many, such media may serve as the sole source of proof for sexualities that deviate from what is still regarded as the heterosexual norm.
Each of the nine early evening TV shows was investigated for five episodes. This investigation was based on a sample of five episodes culled from three Cook 17 streaming initiatives and four broadcast series. The review used the Lavender Tube, a weekly LGBT-focused TV guide, to discover early evening network episodes with prominent sexually impartial, lesbian, and gay characters. In light of The Lavender Tube’s suspension, GLAAD’s distributions “Where We Are on TV” and “Organization Responsibility Index” were used to separate programs for this analysis. By utilizing magazines that feature shows with queer representation, the study focused on shows with established LGBT characters. Based on various considerations, nine shows were chosen from the dozens included in GLAAD’s reports. Therefore, the sample spans multiple genres, including political thrillers, workplace comedy, lighthearted family dramas, and science fiction. Second, each of the shows selected had multiple seasons. Therefore, analysis and data collection using both quantitative and qualitative methods ensued.
The review’s judgments are constrained by the set number of shows evaluated. The evaluation only looked at five episodes from nine different shows. The example did not include satellite television, unscripted television, daytime television, and children’s programming. More research into how LGBT people are portrayed in various forms of media is required. In addition, comparing broadcast and streaming services can be enlightening. Another limitation of this study was the study’s deliberate selection of shows featuring LGBT characters. This allowed for greater study of LGBT character portrayals but was not as reflective of television Cook 37 as a whole. The lack of LGBT characters in a variety of well-known TV shows remains. Another flaw in the review was the lack of cruelty, self-harm, or illicit drug usage in the example, making it impossible to draw meaningful comparisons between straight and LGBT individuals. Analysts may need to revise the meanings of these codes in the future or choose a far more rudimentary set of events to investigate. For this reason, future research should also look into the discrepancies in how gay men and lesbians are portrayed, notably the differences in how men and women exhibit affection.
In general, since roughly 2001, the LGBT community has made tremendous gains in terms of standard agreeability, both on and off-screen. In general, since roughly 2001, the image of LGBT people has improved due to the addition of new characters, most notably sexually open and transgender characters, a change in tone of comedy, and more conspicuous displays of affection by LGBT characters. Despite an increase in the number of shows with LGBT characters starting roughly 2000, the number of shows with LGBT characters has remained consistent lately. Specialty streaming platforms like Hulu, Amazon, and Netflix, on the other hand, can produce episodes with a large number of LGBT characters. There were more LGBT characters in the streaming shows examined in this study, and more calls for warmth from LGBT characters.
Cover, R. (2000). First contact: Queer theory, sexual identity, and “mainstream” film. International Journal of Sexuality and Gender Studies, 5(1), 71-89.
Dean, L., Meyer, I. H., Robinson, K., Sell, R. L., Sember, R., Silenzio, V., … & Xavier, J. (2000). Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender health: Findings and concerns. Journal of the gay and lesbian medical association, 4(3), 102-151.
Padva, G. (2020). Straight Skin, Gay Masks, and Pretending to be Gay on Screen. Routledge.
Siebler, K. (2010). Transqueer representations and how we educate. Journal of LGBT Youth, 7(4), 320-345.
Siebler, K. (2012). Transgender transitions: Sex/gender binaries in the digital age. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Mental Health, 16(1), 74-99.